Noob question on using branches
I have a branch in my git repository that is a "released" branch. It only gets defect fixes as they are needed to patch our production servers.
I want to get all those defect fixes back into the master, but I don't want changes from the master getting into the production branch, so I don't think I want to do:
git checkout master
git merge production
right?
It looks like "git pull --squash . production" will do what I want. Is that correct, or is there a better way? git cherry-pick seems cumbersome when I already know I want everything in the branch (unless there's a way to tell cherry-pick to get the whole branch and I've missed that).
Thanks,
Barry Roberts
Quoted 9 lines · Barry Roberts
I have a branch in my git repository that is a "released" branch. It only gets defect fixes as they are needed to patch our production servers.
I want to get all those defect fixes back into the master, but I don't want changes from the master getting into the production branch, so I don't think I want to do:
git checkout master
git merge production
Why wouldn't you?
The "git merge production" will take all the changes in production and put them in the current branch. You'll get a new revision that contains both the stuff in master and the one in production. But what's important is that the reference "master" is updated to that new revision, but "production" stays where it is.
Just try it, then run "gitk --all" to see if the result is what you wanted. If not, "git reset --hard HEAD^" will move back "master" to where it used to be (read about "git reset" before you run it).
Signature · 1 line
Matthieu
Quoted 14 lines · Matthieu Moy
Quoted 10 lines · Barry Roberts
I have a branch in my git repository that is a "released" branch. It only gets defect fixes as they are needed to patch our production servers.
I want to get all those defect fixes back into the master, but I don't want changes from the master getting into the production branch, so I don't think I want to do:
git checkout master
git merge production
Quoted 8 lines
Why wouldn't you?
The "git merge production" will take all the changes in production and put them in the current branch. You'll get a new revision that contains both the stuff in master and the one in production. But what's important is that the reference "master" is updated to that new revision, but "production" stays where it is.
So it does. That does appear to be exactly what I need.
Quoted 5 lines
Just try it, then run "gitk --all" to see if the result is what you wanted. If not, "git reset --hard HEAD^" will move back "master" to where it used to be (read about "git reset" before you run it).